From m-selig@uiuc.edu  Tue Oct 21 22:44:33 1997
Return-Path: <m-selig@uiuc.edu>
Received: from staff2.cso.uiuc.edu (staff2.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.53])
	by amber.aae.uiuc.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA06232
	for <m-selig@amber.aae.uiuc.edu>; Tue, 21 Oct 1997 22:44:33 -0500
Received: from [128.174.156.41] (swift.aae.uiuc.edu [128.174.156.41])
	by staff2.cso.uiuc.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA26370
	for <m-selig@amber.aae.uiuc.edu>; Tue, 21 Oct 1997 22:46:05 -0400 (EDT)
X-Sender: m-selig@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
Message-Id: <v0311070fb073280ca2af@[128.174.156.41]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 21:48:41 -0600
To: m-selig@amber.aae.uiuc.edu
From: drela@orville.mit.edu (by way of Michael S. Selig)
Subject: Drela Airfoils
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
Content-Length: 6319


Michael,

I have two I can think of right now... both from the
last version of the Decavitator hydrofoil wing system.

MRC-16   Used on the "big"   wing    span x c_avg  =  60" x 2.3"
MRC-20   Used on the "small" wing    span x c_avg  =  36" x 1.4"


MRC-16 design drivers:

Wide bucket, CL ~ 1.2 - 0.3,  7-14 knots
Re*sqrt(CL) = 180K
CD not important at CLmax = 1.2   (7 knot pontoon lift-off speed)
Low CD crucial   at CLmin = 0.3   (14 knot transition speed to "small" wing)
Strong bending strength requirement.


MRC-20 design drivers:

Moderate bucket, CL ~ 1.0 - 0.5,  14-20 knots
Re*sqrt(CL) = 170K
CD important throughout CL range
Extreme bending stiffness requirement.


The somewhat weird layout of the MRC-20 was indicated by LINDOP.
The bump on the bottom is not due to a local thickness constraint,
since there was no spar -- the wing was solid graphite.  Apparently
it was advantageous to "bunch" the thickness at 40% to take advantage
of the nonlinear  stiffness ~ \int t^3 ds  dependence on thickness.

- Mark




